ArticleClinical therapeutics2011
Evaluating the long-term cost-effectiveness of liraglutide versus exenatide BID in patients with type 2 diabetes who fail to improve with oral antidiabetic agents.
Article in Clinical therapeutics, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It reports registered trial NCT00518882. Cited by 14 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Effect of Liraglutide or Exenatide Added to a Background Treatment of Metformin, Sulphonylurea or a Combination of Both on Glycaemic Control in Subjects With Type 2 Diabetes
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Glucagon-like peptide 1 agonists for treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes who fail metformin monotherapy: systematic review and meta-analysis of economic evaluation studies.BMJ open diabetes research & care · 2020Pooled it
- Cost Effectiveness of Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) Inhibitors, Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 (GLP-1) Receptor Agonists, and Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 (DPP-4) Inhibitors: A Systematic Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2019Pooled it
- How Consistent is the Relationship between Improved Glucose Control and Modelled Health Outcomes for People with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus? a Systematic Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2017Pooled it
- Cost effectiveness of liraglutide in type II diabetes: a systematic review.PharmacoEconomics · 2014Pooled it
- Assessing the Effect of Including Social Costs in Economic Evaluations of Diabetes-Related Interventions: A Systematic Review.ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR · 2021Review
- A review of glycemic efficacy of liraglutide once daily in achieving glycated hemoglobin targets compared with exenatide twice daily, or sitagliptin once daily in the treatment of type 2 diabetes.Saudi medical journal · 2016Review
- Health economic evaluation of type 2 diabetes mellitus: a clinical practice focused review.Clinical medicine insights. Endocrinology and diabetes · 2015Review
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of liraglutide versus sitagliptin or exenatide in patients with inadequately controlled Type 2 diabetes on oral antidiabetic drugs in Greece.BMC health services research · 2014Article
- Exenatide twice daily: a review of its use in the management of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.Drugs · 2014Review
- Real-world cost-effectiveness: lower cost of treating patients to glycemic goal with liraglutide versus exenatide.Advances in therapy · 2014Article
- Review of models used in economic analyses of new oral treatments for type 2 diabetes mellitus.PharmacoEconomics · 2014Review
- Glucagon-like peptide-1 analogues: An overview.Indian journal of endocrinology and metabolism · 2013Article
- Exenatide extended-release; clinical trials, patient preference, and economic considerations.Patient preference and adherence · 2013Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe global clinical and economic burden of type 2 diabetes is substantial. Recently, clinical trials with glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists (liraglutide and exenatide) have shown a multifactorial clinical profile with the potential to address many of the clinical needs of patients and reduce the burden of disease.
objectiveThe goal of this study was to evaluate the long-term cost-effectiveness of once-daily liraglutide versus exenatide BID in patients with type 2 diabetes who failed to improve with metformin and/or sulfonylurea, based on the results of a previous clinical trial in 6 European countries (Switzerland, Denmark, Norway, Finland, the Netherlands, and Austria).
methodsA validated computer simulation model of diabetes was used to predict life expectancy, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incidence of diabetes-related complications in patients receiving liraglutide (1.8 mg once daily) or exenatide (10 μg BID). Baseline cohort characteristics and treatment effects were derived from the Liraglutide Effect and Action in Diabetes 6 trial. Country-specific complication costs were taken from published sources. Simulations were run over 40 years from third-party payer perspectives. Future costs and clinical benefits were discounted at country-specific discount rates. Sensitivity analyses were performed.
resultsLiraglutide was associated with improvements of 0.12 to 0.17 QALY and a reduced incidence of most diabetes-related complications versus exenatide in all settings. Evaluation of total direct medical costs (treatment plus complication costs) suggest that liraglutide was likely to cost between Euro (€) 1023 and €1866 more than exenatide over patients' lifetimes, leading to incremental cost-effectiveness ratios per QALY gained versus exenatide of: Switzerland, CHF (Swiss francs) 10,950 (€6902); Denmark, Danish krone [kr] 88,160 (€11,805); Norway, Norwegian krone [kr], 111,916 (€13,546); Finland, €8459; the Netherlands, €8119; and Austria, €8516.
conclusionsLong-term projections indicated that liraglutide was associated with benefits in life expectancy, QALYs, and reduced complication rates versus exenatide. Liraglutide was cost-effective from a health care payer perspective in Switzerland, Denmark, Norway, Finland, the Netherlands, and Austria.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.